Limited Approach to Human Rights at Sea at Third UN Oceans Conference

The third UN Oceans Conference ‘Our Ocean, Our Future, Our Responsibility’ held in Nice, France, 9-13 June 2025, was a key opportunity for the emerging agenda around the protection of human rights at sea to be internationally profiled and advanced. Unfortunately, it failed to deliver to the extent required to more effectively address widespread abuse of persons at sea.

From the outset, human rights and the social dimension of sustainability did not hold obvious sway in the delivery of the international event despite several independent side events, and related endorsements.

Instead, human rights considerations appear to be assumed as being de facto included in maritime activities while the more important state-level public assurance around comprehensively protecting the human rights of persons at sea was lacking.

It can be argued that tokenism remains at the heart of such UN conference activities to protect those persons living, working and transiting at sea. This is underpinned, for example, by the lack of explicit reference in the framework UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) 1982 for human rights’ protections of the individual, the lack of national enforcement of key ocean treaties, and an increasing level of state-led impunity in the abuse of individual’s human rights globally.

SDG 14

In Nice, the overarching theme was “Accelerating action and mobilizing all actors to conserve and sustainably use the ocean”.

The Conference aim was stated as being ‘to support further and urgent action to conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development and identify further ways and means to support the implementation of SDG 14’.

Unfortunately, SDG 14 Life below Water (Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development) does not explicitly cover fundamental human rights protections, and therefore itself fails to trigger an explicit focus on human sustainability.

One could say that it was a missed opportunity for reinforcing the human rights at sea narrative.

Unsurprisingly, national interests remain focused around the dominant positioning of economic influence and business conduct while effective and well-resourced NGO lobbying is triggering strong support for environmental sustainability.

The irony is that neither economic nor environmental sustainability can be effective without the intimate involvement of the human element.

Consequently, the challenge for profiling of what form of key sustainability is important, where the impact will be best felt, and where state-level investment must flow continues with human rights protections seemingly at the back of the queue.

Profiling

UNOC events with associated headlines around engaging with human rights at sea were evident, most notably in respect of illegal unregulated and unreported fishing (IUU), individual state positions on banning harmful foreign fishing activities inside national waters; and the academic approach under the EU-funded Bluerights platform.

Positively, new state ratifications of ILO C188 Working in Fishing Convention and the Agreement on Marine Biological Diversity of Areas beyond National Jurisdiction (BBNJ Agreement), bans on bottom trawling in Marine Protected Areas, and collective action to achieve the 30x30 implementation (calls for the conservation of 30% of Earth's land and sea by 2030 through protected areas and other conservation methods) on ocean conservation were obvious highlights of the event.

Human Rights Fragmentation?

A decade on from the establishment of the civil society platform Human Rights at Sea, the narrative on what the human rights at sea narrative means, its impact on state-level activities, on applicable law and policy development, and its inclusion within the scope of the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) remains fragmented.

In the current geo-political climate dominated by attacks on the post Second World War (western) norms of the rule of law, including the lawful functioning of states under the UN umbrella and the established rules-based approach; one should ask whether we should dare to suggest that the universality of human rights can be said to still be a norm and consistently achievable?

Without doubt, those in the pro camp will rightly stick to the position of the continued functioning of, and necessity for, the protection and advancement of fundamental human rights for all persons both on land and at sea.

Tragically, current world events are increasingly indicating that the protection of fundamental rights is no longer a priority. To a degree, it felt the same in Nice.

Are Human Rights’ Protections Realistic?

We are increasingly being forced to address the deeply uncomfortable position of whether fundamental human rights are realistically achievable in today’s world. This view is set against an increasing breakdown in the global rules-based order, the rapid rise of ultra-nationalism, abuse of workers rights, rapid international rearming triggered by increasing numbers of international armed conflicts, and the systemic abuse of established International Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law by states demonstrating unrestrained impunity.

The Inconceivable?

What must now be addressed (and what would have seemed unconceivable to the ordinary person in 2023), is that with the increasing breakdown in the international rule of law; the rise of state-level impunity setting poor standards for the conduct of state and non-state interactions; and a paradigm shift in the world order led by superpowers hell-bent on resource, financial and ideological dominance – is that the protection of fundamental human rights is becoming a luxury side-thought set against core considerations of national, commercial and individual survival.

ENDS.

Source: HRAS International

Photo: HRAS International

Contact: If you have any questions, please write to us at enquiries@hrasi.org.

About Sharing. We welcome the use and dissemination of our copyrighted work with full, accurate and proper accreditation. Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.